dzogchungpa wrote:Well, did you or didn't you? I'm not asking you to prove it.

Well, I guess that saying that I have will still rank lower than the other things I do on my insanity certification card, so the answer is "yes".

OK, now we're getting somewhere. Can you tell us something about what life on these other planets is like?

More diverse than what most people can possibly imagine, but I don't think we are getting somewhere. Rather we are getting in a territory which is totally unproductive, because I do not have any kind of perceived authority. These questions should be asked to Norbu Rinpoche and others, who have made such statements, and whose word actually means something for Dharma practitioners. He knows a lot about this and I am sure he will share openly much information if he feels that the audience is mature enough. Arranging this second part may be tricky but probably not that impossible during one of his retreats.

Ivo wrote:Rather we are getting in a territory which is totally unproductive, because I do not have any kind of perceived authority.

Aren't you a lama?

For a limited number of people I may be in this role, but what I do is very controversial and I can not serve here as any kind of authority. As this topic of discussion is quite serious and has a lot of implications it will be meaningful only if some "universally" accepted teacher comes forward with some clear statements. Norbu Rinpoche has given the first hints, as is usual for him, and it is up to his students to pick it up from there and ask for a more detailed explanation. If he sees it beneficial in furthering someones' practice I am sure he will expand on the topic, at least in front of limited audience. If he feels that it is just some form of unhealthy curiosity he might not. It may not be very easy for someone to ask him this question in a serious and down-to-earth manner, but since there are very few masters with his level of attainment and knowledge, it will always be good to try.

Ivo wrote:As this topic of discussion is quite serious and has a lot of implications it will be meaningful only if some "universally" accepted teacher comes forward with some clear statements.

What kind of implications are you referring to?

Well... think for yourself what it would mean if a certain Buddha field from which a certain doctrine is said to have originated can be correlated to a physically observable place in our universe. The implications are more than what most Dharma practitioners will be able to handle comfortably.

Ivo wrote:As this topic of discussion is quite serious and has a lot of implications it will be meaningful only if some "universally" accepted teacher comes forward with some clear statements.

What kind of implications are you referring to?

Well... think for yourself what it would mean if a certain Buddha field from which a certain doctrine is said to have originated can be correlated to a physically observable place in our universe. The implications are more than what most Dharma practitioners will be able to handle comfortably.

Personally, I would find that very interesting. I don't see why that would make someone uncomfortable.

Through Dzogchen we can really understand what God is and we don’t have to worry if there is a God or not. God always exists as our real nature, the base, for everybody. - Chögyal Namkhai Norbu

Ivo wrote:Well... think for yourself what it would mean if a certain Buddha field from which a certain doctrine is said to have originated can be correlated to a physically observable place in our universe. The implications are more than what most Dharma practitioners will be able to handle comfortably.

Personally, I would find that very interesting. I don't see why that would make someone uncomfortable.

Ivo wrote:As this topic of discussion is quite serious and has a lot of implications it will be meaningful only if some "universally" accepted teacher comes forward with some clear statements.

What kind of implications are you referring to?

Well... think for yourself what it would mean if a certain Buddha field from which a certain doctrine is said to have originated can be correlated to a physically observable place in our universe. The implications are more than what most Dharma practitioners will be able to handle comfortably.

Well, the present day origin of Dzogchen teaching can be correlated to a physically identifiable place in the Universe and we are located on it. Otherwise, since most Mahāyāna practitioners who are familiar with the accounts of the universe, for example, as presented in the opening chapters of the Avatamska sutras will have no problem with the idea of the existence of planets in other solar systems and civilizations which exist in them. Nor for that matter will Star Wars fans be that suprised:

In any case, the first chapter of the sgra thal gyur identifies 13 buddhafields where Dzogchen is practiced. The introduction to the The Supreme Source discusses these in much detail.

It should be noted however that in terms of textual history, there is no mention anywhere of this concept in Tibetan literature which can be reliably dated earlier than the sgra thal rgyur itself, which most likely was compiled between the 10th and 11th centuries.

Ivo wrote:A careful reading of the Vimalakirti Nirdesa Sutra will also appeal to some Star Wars fans, and it seems to be one of the early texts, although not of Tibetan origin.

Indeed, the concept that this or that form of Buddhadharma is being practiced in some other world system than our own is not an innovation of Dzogchen texts, but appears in Mahāyāna texts from an early time.

For me it seems perfectly plausible that there would be beings on planets in other solar systems (even maybe in this solar system) practicing natural awareness, but the question that arises in my mind is: So what? How does that affect me here and now?

For me it seems perfectly plausible that there would be beings on planets in other solar systems (even maybe in this solar system) practicing natural awareness...

Although on this planet, in a completely "different realm", I read an autobiography of an early 20th century Catholic Priest that accidentally stumbled on Dzogchen/Mahamudra which freaked him out. He ended up leaving the Church because it didn't jive with what he had been taught and was teaching. (He taught theology at the Vatican to other priests.) He was writing in the '40s so he didn't use those terms, all he knew was that we are never separated from Truth, which is in direct conflict with the story of Adam and Eve.

After he left the priesthood he went to Hollywood and played a Tibetan monk in "Lost Horizon". Sounds like a karmic premonition for his next rebirth to me!

A human being has his limits. And thus, in every conceivable way, with every possible means, he tries to make the teaching enter into his own limits. ChNN

For me it seems perfectly plausible that there would be beings on planets in other solar systems (even maybe in this solar system) practicing natural awareness...

Although on this planet, in a completely "different realm", I read an autobiography of an early 20th century Catholic Priest that accidentally stumbled on Dzogchen/Mahamudra which freaked him out. He ended up leaving the Church because it didn't jive with what he had been taught and was teaching. (He taught theology at the Vatican to other priests.) He was writing in the '40s so he didn't use those terms, all he knew was that we are never separated from Truth, which is in direct conflict with the story of Adam and Eve.

After he left the priesthood he went to Hollywood and played a Tibetan monk in "Lost Horizon". Sounds like a karmic premonition for his next rebirth to me!

Actually its completely congruent with a non literal reading of the Adam and Eve mythos...Which is exactly the conclusion the Christian monk Bede Griffith came to when he came upon Dzogchen..The Garden is our Primordial State.

Simon E. wrote:Actually its completely congruent with a non literal reading of the Adam and Eve mythos...Which is exactly the conclusion the Christian monk Bede Griffith came to when he came upon Dzogchen..The Garden is our Primordial State.

Yes. And the fruit of the knowledge about good and bad, right and wrong is the beginning of judgement, the root of dualism.

John Tettemer. "I Was a Monk" copyrighted 1951. The experience he is talking about happened in the 1930s, long before Dharma became a meme in the West.

Actually its completely congruent with a non literal reading of the Adam and Eve mythos...Which is exactly the conclusion the Christian monk Bede Griffith came to when he came upon Dzogchen..The Garden is our Primordial State.

This wasn't an academic exercise on his part. He stumbled on the meditational experience of it. All underlinings are his:

*****************************************************

"…had naturally begotten in me a power of concentration beyond the average. My hour of mental prayer every morning and another hour every evening for nearly a quarter of a century had given me a facility in quieting the life of the senses of the discursive mind, and a capacity for fixing my attention with a quiet steady regard on the subject of consideration. (=shamata imo, not his term)

…I brooded over the mystery of life, not trying to solve it, but striving to lose myself in its depth, allowing its inexplicableness to flow over me.

This was the effect of my contemplation upon me. A new faculty of knowing seemed to be born in me, in the quiet stillness yet intense activity of consciousness within me. I seemed to touch the heart of reality, the very essence of existence, with a directness, an immediacy, rendering all my former knowledge false and illusory. As it were, I seemed to sense another dimension; or perhaps I should express it better were I to say that all dimensions seemed to go, leaving me conscious of presence, a reality having no form that the senses could comprehend, yet not abstract and lifeless, as were the ideas of the mind, but concrete, vital, palpitating with realness.

**************************************************************

Sounds more like Mahamudra than Dzogchen per se, since he credits his "shamatha" as a precursor. I'd wager any Mahamudra teacher would be pleased if their student reported that experience in meditation. And remember; he had never heard of either Mahamudra or Dzogchen when he was writing this. He had no idea what to make of it. Up until then he had been a hard-core Catholic priest. He taught theology at the Vatican!

If anyone bothers to buy it, the first 200+ pages are his life as a Catholic priest up until then. If you're interested in his experience and how it effected him, skip to the end.

A human being has his limits. And thus, in every conceivable way, with every possible means, he tries to make the teaching enter into his own limits. ChNN

John Tettemer. "I Was a Monk" copyrighted 1951. The experience he is talking about happened in the 1930s, long before Dharma became a meme in the West.

OK, thanks. I will point out that Dharma was a "meme" in the west long before the 30's. For example the Theosophical Society was founded in 1875 in New York, and its motto was "Satyan nasti paro dharmah".

Through Dzogchen we can really understand what God is and we don’t have to worry if there is a God or not. God always exists as our real nature, the base, for everybody. - Chögyal Namkhai Norbu

John Tettemer. "I Was a Monk" copyrighted 1951. The experience he is talking about happened in the 1930s, long before Dharma became a meme in the West.

Actually its completely congruent with a non literal reading of the Adam and Eve mythos...Which is exactly the conclusion the Christian monk Bede Griffith came to when he came upon Dzogchen..The Garden is our Primordial State.

This wasn't an academic exercise on his part. He stumbled on the meditational experience of it. All underlinings are his:

*****************************************************

"…had naturally begotten in me a power of concentration beyond the average. My hour of mental prayer every morning and another hour every evening for nearly a quarter of a century had given me a facility in quieting the life of the senses of the discursive mind, and a capacity for fixing my attention with a quiet steady regard on the subject of consideration. (=shamata imo, not his term)

…I brooded over the mystery of life, not trying to solve it, but striving to lose myself in its depth, allowing its inexplicableness to flow over me.

This was the effect of my contemplation upon me. A new faculty of knowing seemed to be born in me, in the quiet stillness yet intense activity of consciousness within me. I seemed to touch the heart of reality, the very essence of existence, with a directness, an immediacy, rendering all my former knowledge false and illusory. As it were, I seemed to sense another dimension; or perhaps I should express it better were I to say that all dimensions seemed to go, leaving me conscious of presence, a reality having no form that the senses could comprehend, yet not abstract and lifeless, as were the ideas of the mind, but concrete, vital, palpitating with realness.

**************************************************************

Sounds more like Mahamudra than Dzogchen per se, since he credits his "shamatha" as a precursor. I'd wager any Mahamudra teacher would be pleased if their student reported that experience in meditation. And remember; he had never heard of either Mahamudra or Dzogchen when he was writing this. He had no idea what to make of it. Up until then he had been a hard-core Catholic priest. He taught theology at the Vatican!

If anyone bothers to buy it, the first 200+ pages are his life as a Catholic priest up until then. If you're interested in his experience and how it effected him, skip to the end.

I wasn't of course implying that this was other than experiential rather than academic.He Bede Griffith, later learned about Dzogchen and I think that he identified his experience as that.It is also worth noting that for the rest of his long life he remained a Catholic monk and priest.